Posted on 10/10/2007 6:39:21 AM PDT by cartan
In 1988, the surgeon general, C. Everett Koop, proclaimed ice cream to a be public-health menace right up there with cigarettes. Alluding to his office's famous 1964 report on the perils of smoking, Dr. Koop announced that the American diet was a problem of “comparable” magnitude, chiefly because of the high-fat foods that were causing coronary heart disease and other deadly ailments.
He introduced his report with these words: “The depth of the science base underlying its findings is even more impressive than that for tobacco and health in 1964.”
That was a ludicrous statement, as Gary Taubes demonstrates in his new book meticulously debunking diet myths, “Good Calories, Bad Calories” (Knopf, 2007). The notion that fatty foods shorten your life began as a hypothesis based on dubious assumptions and data; when scientists tried to confirm it they failed repeatedly. The evidence against Häagen-Dazs was nothing like the evidence against Marlboros.
It may seem bizarre that a surgeon general could go so wrong. After all, wasn't it his job to express the scientific consensus? But that was the problem. Dr. Koop was expressing the consensus. He, like the architects of the federal “food pyramid” telling Americans what to eat, went wrong by listening to everyone else. He was caught in what social scientists call a cascade.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Now why don't they go on and apply their “cascade” model of scientific consensus to global warming?
“Scientific consensus” is about as valid as “emotional proof.”
cascade” model of scientific consensus to global warming?
They will, but like the last report took about 20 years to write based on 25 year old data, it may take 40 plus years for them to get it write on Global Warming.
This is excellent. It’s an example even libs can understand even if they choose to ignore it. An individual human is a much less complex system than the earth’s ecosystem. Even if you presented it as 2 systems of equal complexity, humans are easier to study, and modify inputs.
Anyway, with humans, we still can’t figure out things that are good and bad for us:
Eggs are good, er wait, bad, I mean good.
Coffee - good or bad.
Chicken - causes cancer, no it doesn’t.
Chocolate - bad, I mean good.
Red meat - bad, wait, you need it.
And lots of other examples.
Good find.
“Informational Cascade” - the diet of democrats.
A very medical science savvy gentleman told me years ago that the science never supported the fat/cholesterol heart disease link, they took a few inconclusive studies and ran with them.
Methinks certain groups out there (Ahem-MSM) attempt the cascade on a regular basis.
As far as the fat theory, I see-sawed in an 8 pound range for about 5 years doing the low fat thing. I found a book called “The Fat Fallacy.” I dropped 15 pounds over a few months, and run 2 or 3 pounds less than that once I added a little more natural fat, and a lot less fake snack foods.
Fair warning: The author brings some anti-corporate politics into the mix, but the overall message works.
I have predicted to my wife that history will eventually show that refined carbs and HFCS were two of the greatest plagues to be unleashed on humans.
If I can only live long enough to see it. Time to go eat a snickers.
The Schwarzbein(sp?) Principle is a great book that explains the fallacy of the low fat diet. Cut out refined carbs altogether and limit intake of processed foods.
If it’s consensus, it’s not science. If it’s science, there’s no need for consensus......
Carbs are what puts the lard on people. I dropped over 50 lbs by cutting out the carbs...bread, cereal, sugar, etc....
Dr. Atkins is right.....
To put it simply: Fat doesn’t make you fat. Too much sugar does make you fat. Follow my simple diet. I eat no desserts and no bedtime snacks during the weekdays. Then I indulge a little on the weekends. I lost 20 lbs.
According to Stephen Ambrose in Undaunted Courage the men of the Lewis and Clark expedition were at one point eating up to thirteen pounds of meat a day!
And this is how "global dieting" preceded "global warming".
“A very medical science savvy gentleman told me years ago that the science never supported the fat/cholesterol heart disease link, they took a few inconclusive studies and ran with them.”
I have a recipe for health, the same one that’s been used for centuries with a small modification for modern times:
Moderation, excersize and avoid drugs unless you REALLY need them.
I am 50, and take no prescriptions. If I go to the doctor, I’m sure he’d have me on 5 medications by the time he was done with me. And with the interactions, in a few years I’d need 4 different medications and 3 new ones. Bah.
I’ve been on Atkins since March and the results of my bloodwork are fantastic. I’ve lost 22 lbs., have more to go, but I’d rather lose it slowly and keep it off forever.
Carbs are also what is causing the epidemic of diabetes.
Insulin overload.
And I’ve read a few studies that seem to indicate that one of the biochemicals you want to keep to a minimum in your body is that one - insulin. Seems to have alot to do with aging.
IF you are interested in Omega-3, Omega-6 balance etc., pick up “The Hidden Story of Cancer”. It will really twist your noodle if you follow the latest Fish Oil supplementation theories.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.